I thought we should discuss how we rate a portrait. 
By sharing our different perspectives  we might all learn some new ways of looking at, and improving if we wish, our own work.
Here are my criteria (feel free to comment/criticise): 
a) Does the image catch my eye, and retain my attention?

b) Does the background enhance or distract from the portrait?

c) Has the photographer got close, then got closer?

d) Is the subject separated from the background?

e) Is there a catch-light in the model's eyes?

f) Has light (and shade) been used to enhance mood, impact, and meaning?

g) If In-Studio was this a better choice than and Environmental Portrait, and vice-versa?

h) Do the colours within the portrait match each other and the intent?

i) Is the model posed to best effect, especially hands and expression

How do you judge portraits?

Peter,

I see you've just  joined last month.  Welcome!  Thank you for starting this thread.  I hope you'll get lots of responses.  You've clearly given a lot of thought to portraiture.  The nine points are important considerations.  

When we make a portrait, we record more than physical appearance - we record the subject's reaction to the photographer.  Think of the Jousuf Karsh portrait of Winston Churchill - the look of defiance that was captured . . . . . https://karsh.org/photographs/winston-churchill/ . . . .    I'm not a portrait photographer,  just a viewer of portrait photographs, but it's my opinion that expression is as important as technique, perhaps even more so.  A professional model will give you a professional expression, but a genuine expression is unmistakeable. 

Again - just my opinion. 

. . . .  Steven T. 

Hi Peter,

I really appreciate this list,  it’s thoughtful and a good foundation for evaluating portraits. But for me, it always comes back to connection and honesty. I could spend hours with a model, capturing the same pose over and over that might tick every box on a checklist, but I wouldn’t be satisfied until I saw "it". That moment when the person lets their emotional guard down, when their shoulders soften, when they look into the lens like they know it personally. That’s what I’m waiting for.

Of course the light, the background, the colors.. they all matter, but only in how they support the truth of the person in front of the camera. The technical elements can elevate an image, but they can’t create that rawness or the sense that you’re really seeing someone.

I’ve seen unforgettable portraits taken with disposable cameras with terrible light, Polaroids, you name it. If we get too focused on checklists, we risk losing those magical moments. The portraits that stay with us aren’t always the ones that are technically perfect. They’re the ones that feel real, that make us stop and see the person, that make us ask questions.

All the best,

Tammy

Thanks Tammy. I agree.

50 or so years ago I took some photos at my then grandad-in-laws 80th birthday using an Adox Golf 35mm. I was intent on capturing the mood and got some great pictures. I didn't mean my list as a 'how to take portraits' guide, rather an insight into the different aspects I found myself using (rightly or wrongly) when critiquing photos.
I was pleased to see my first item 'Does the image catch my eye, and retain my attention?' aligns with your philosophy!